Inquiry faults Manning treatment

The commander of the Marine base where Wikileaks suspect Pvt. Bradley Manning was jailed for nearly 10 months ordered an inquiry into his treatment and then overruled one of the investigator’s findings, Marine Corps documents obtained by POLITICO show.

A special investigation determined that Manning’s jailers violated Navy policy by keeping him on suicide watch after psychiatrists concluded he was not a threat to himself, but the commander rejected that conclusion, according to the documents.

Story Continued Below

The Obama administration this year became embroiled in questions over Manning’s treatment at Quantico after his jail conditions — including a requirement at one point that he be stripped of all clothing — drew complaints from human rights groups and liberal activists.

Then-State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley joined in the criticism, calling Manning’s treatment “ridiculous and counterproductive and stupid.” After President Barack Obama was asked about Crowley’s comments at a White House press conference, Crowley resigned. Obama said the military had assured him that Manning’s treatment was appropriate. But in April Manning was moved to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where he is being detained under more lax conditions.

On Tuesday, a United Nations official again complained publicly that the U.S. military has denied his request for a confidential meeting with Manning. “It is imperative that I talk to Mr. Manning under conditions where I can be assured that he is being absolutely candid,” U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture Juan Mendez said in a statement.

Manning — a junior Army intelligence analyst — has been in custody since May of last year, charged with aiding the enemy, leaking classified and unclassified files from military computer networks and exceeding his authorized access to military computer systems, among other crimes.

The Marines deleted the name and rank of the officer who conducted the “special inquiry” from documents released to POLITICO recently in response to a Freedom of Information Act request filed in March. However, military records posted on the Internet identify the Corrections Section chief as Chief Warrant Officer-5 Abel Galaviz.

Galaviz’s review, conducted in February, largely rejected Manning’s complaints that he was being treated too harshly. The senior corrections specialist concluded that the Quantico brig commander, Chief Warrant Officer-4 James Averhart Jr., did not abuse his discretion by classifying Manning as a maximum security prisoner, by placing him on a “prevention of injury” watch or by putting him on suicide watch.

However, Galaviz said that brig personnel ignored the Navy Corrections Manual when they kept Manning on suicide watch in August 2010 and January 2011 for several days after doctors said it was inappropriate.

“On two occasions … a medical officer determined that suicide risk status was no longer warranted and the brig staff did not immediately take PFC Manning off the suicide risk status,” Galaviz wrote in his February 23 findings. In one instance, the suicide watch continued for five days after doctors recommended it be canceled and in another it went on for two to three days, the review found.

“Once the medical officer’s evaluation was provided to brig staff, steps should have been taken to immediately remove him from suicide risk, to a status below that,” Galaviz wrote. He urged that the Quantico brig’s operating procedures be changed to “direct the brig staff to remove confinees from suicide risk immediately upon receiving a medical officer’s evaluation.”

The released documents also confirm that psychiatrists or psychologists recommended on at least 20 occasions that Manning be removed from “prevention of injury” status, a level of restriction just below suicide watch, but brig commanders rejected the recommendations.

On March 1, Quantico commander Col. Daniel Choike issued a memo embracing most of Galaviz’s report but rejecting the corrections specialist’s only critique of Manning’s treatment.

“There is no requirement … that requires an immediate removal from suicide risk after the [brig’s] mental health care provider or medical officer recommends it,” Choike wrote to Manning. The delays in removing Manning from suicide watch were “reasonable in light of all the information available to the [brig] commander and applicable … procedures,” Choike concluded. “I do not concur with [Galaviz] that an ‘immediate move’ is required.”

When Manning was transferred to Fort Leavenworth in April, the Pentagon’s top lawyer insisted that Manning’s treatment at Quantico had complied with the law and military regulations at every turn.

“Many will be tempted to interpret today’s action as a criticism of the pre-trial facility at Quantico. That is not the case,” Defense Department General Counsel Jeh Johnson told reporters at a news conference April 19. “We remain satisfied that Private Manning’s pre-trial confinement at Quantico was in compliance with legal and regulatory standards in all respects, and we salute the military personnel there for the job they did in difficult circumstances.”

A spokesman for Johnson told POLITICO that the legal adviser was unaware of the Marine Corps “special inquiry” and its conclusion that the suicide watches imposed on Manning went on too long. “Mr. Johnson wasn’t aware of that finding when he conducted the press briefing,” Army Lt. Col. James Gregory said.

Choike said in an April 8 memo that he’d directed the brig to “update its regulations” to show that a medical officer’s determination that a prisoner is not a suicide risk “is binding on the PCF staff and the detainee shall be removed from suicide risk.” However, the colonel’s memo did not appear to address how quickly such a move must take place, according to the documents the Marines released. Substantial portions of the documents were deleted on privacy grounds.

In the April memo, directed to the Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus, Choike also minimized the impact of the suicide risk status on Manning.

“As PFC Manning was already administratively segregated as a maximum custody detainee and under special handling instructions for the prevention of injury, the only additional instructions for suicide risk was the removal of PFC Manning’s outer garments and his eyeglasses and the posting of a guard who could keep PFC Manning under continuous observation,” Choike wrote.

Manning’s complaint about his treatment was formally rejected by the Navy, which oversees the Marine Corps, on June 13. Assistant Navy Secretary for Manpower and Reserve Affairs Juan Garcia wrote to Manning that he concurred with Choike’s conclusion that Manning’s complaint was “without merit.”

Garcia also said that even if Manning’s complaint had merit, his transfer to Leavenworth made unavailable the relief Manning requested at the brig — a move from maximum security to medium security and an end to the prevention of injury watch.

Choike declined to be interviewed for this story. “The base commander’s and the brig commander’s main concern is always and will continue to be the safety of all those in their care,” a Quantico spokesman said.

Crowley told POLITICO that the Navy review of Manning’s complaint largely ignored the question of whether the prisoner’s treatment was wise.

“I never questioned that the brig commander had the authority to do what he did,” Crowley said. “I questioned why the echelons above the brig commander failed to see how his treatment, particularly discretionary judgments regarding the potential for injury and suicide, was undermining the credibility of his pending and necessary prosecution. … It is clear in the documents that there was a division of opinion between the brig commander and the mental health professionals.”

“No one in the chain of command was looking at the bigger picture,” Crowley added. “The Army eventually got it right, once it took back responsibility for Private Manning from the Marine Corps.”

Manning’s civilian defense attorney, David Coombs, declined to comment. However, in a blog post last month, Coombs said that if Manning’s case proceeds to a court martial he plans to complain to the military judge that Manning’s treatment violated the Uniform Code of Military Justice, which says pre-trial confinement shall not be “more rigorous than the circumstances required to insure [a defendant’s] presence.”

The inquiry did not address orders given by Averhart’s successor, Chief Warrant Officer Denise Barnes, in March that Manning be stripped naked while in his cell. The order followed what Manning’s lawyer says was a “sarcastic quip” the prisoner made that he could kill himself with his underwear wasteband or his flip-flops. The documents say that complaint is being handled separately.

The Army announced in April that Manning was found competent for trial. However, Army spokeswoman Shaunteh Kelly said no date has been scheduled for his long-delayed preliminary hearing.

POLITICO’s request to the Marine Corps for records related to Manning’s complaints was rejected twice by Quantico officials. In both instances, Navy Freedom of Information Act officials granted appeals filed by POLITICO and instructed the Quantico command to consider the request again.